Have Gone Vegan

words that'll trigger the "anti-woke" crowd

Disclaimer: even before going vegan my politics leaned about as far left as left can go, so undoubtedly my "leftist" bias will be showing in my possibly LONGEST post to date.

Also, congratulations to the many Americans (younger ones especially!) NOT voting for election-deniers, conspiracy theorists or extremists during November's mid-terms. Canadians applaud you. (But boo to Floridians and Texans who re-elected Republicans hell-bent on implementing anti-abortion, anti-gay, and anti-transgender legislation.*) 

Note: this post was begun in late October, but the recent Club Q shooting (and subsequent response by those who helped stoke hostility towards LBGTQ+ members), only reinforce some of the reasons I give later on for writing it in the first place.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Alright, let's start with the one word that has helped trigger an almost world-wide (okay, UK, USA, Australia and Canada at least) moral panic (trans panic to be specific) that in my opinion could even be viewed as a social contagion of sorts given how it has spread: 

WOKE

And just in case you haven't come across this term yet, count your lucky stars as it seems to have become ubiquitous both online and in media print. While the term "woke" (and "stay woke") originated in the States among black activists years ago to mean being aware of racial injustice and discrimination, it is now more often used as a pejorative insult against people, institutions and ideas perceived as too progressive, in particular when it comes to issues concerning race and gender inclusion. 

Which means we now have woke as an adjective describing almost anything and everything (plus there are so many derivatives of the word, like wokeness and wokified, it's hard to keep count), and I've even seen Wokes used as a noun to refer to people. Say what? 

And it wouldn't even be so bad except that you have anti-woke sites popping up everywhere (e.g., Vote Against Woke – deleted as it violated election laws, Stop Woke Activism, and the especially insidious Blueprint for Canada – sorry, I wasn’t going to amplify these sites by linking, but the Blueprint site is just so ridiculously off the mark that I couldn’t resist adding a few links at the bottom of this post**), and worse, a concerted effort during municipal elections to stack school boards with regressive anti-woke trustees. Thankfully, most of them DIDN'T get elected, but they sure tried. (Sadly, anti-woke school election candidates in the US did have more success.)

(To be clear, "wokeism" isn't only decried by those on the political right, as there's a segment on the political left – in higher education and publishing particularly – also strongly denouncing "woke culture" as illiberal.)

So, in no particular order, let the partial list (I'm sure I've missed a bunch) of knuckle-clenching words for the woke-fearing (ha, made up my own woke word) begin:

• left or leftist (but notice how you don't really see "rightist" too much) 
• progressive 
• politically correct (remember when this precursor term to woke was in vogue?)
• trigger warning
• victim 
• Antifa (because being anti-fascist and anti-racist is a bad thing?)
• diversity
• inclusion
• identity politics (as if white, straight, Christian, etc., aren't identities used in politics as well)
• oppression
• intersectionality (tsk, tsk, as if one identity/oppression wasn't already too much)
• gender theory
• gender expression
• gender identity (yes, Virginia, there IS such a thing as gender and it IS distinct from biological sex)
• gender affirmation (and gender-affirmation care)
• transgender 
• trans women (saying "trans women are women" will really set them off)
• cis or cisgender (also irrationally loathed)
• okay, basically anything containing the word gender (except for gender-critical)
• genderqueer, genderfluid, nonbinary (because heaven help us if we can't classify folk into neat confining little boxes like male, female, feminine, masculine)
• pronouns (amazing how itty bitty words like he/she/they can irrationally irritate a woke-fearing person like almost nothing else)
• trans-exclusionary radical feminism (TERF for short, but there is nothing radical or feminist about it, which is maybe why they prefer to sugarcoat it by using the term gender-critical instead – also, in a twisted way, the acronym TERF is considered by most who practice it not only to be a slur, but actual hate speech, even though hate is exactly the effect of what they’re promoting)
• social justice 
• social justice warrior (usually SJW for short)
• equity (equality of opportunity is MAYBE okay, but NOT equity of outcome)
• inequity (because that implies that some benefit from unequal outcomes)
• racism (believe it or not, but this term is actually viewed by some as an anti-white slur)
• racist (some people consider being CALLED a racist more outrageous than someone actually BEING a racist—I know, it boggles the mind)
• anti-racism (again, a big no no, because while not being racist is one thing, actively trying to dismantle racism seems to be beyond the pale) 
• systemic racism (this notion is considered especially offensive—not that it exists, but that some have the nerve to suggest it exists)
• critical race theory (or CRT for short, is SO explosive for some that apparently the only way they can deal with the notion of trying to explain racism is to denounce the theory itself as racist)
• Diversity, Equity, Inclusion initiatives or DEI for short (some prefer strategies like The Theory of Racelessness which argues that there is no such thing as race, and to think so is racist, reminding me of those who claim to be colourblind when it comes to race and who will quote MLK as if he was saying to ignore the colour of someone's skin instead of not judging a person by it)
• privilege (white privilege especially, and this may be because many of us have had the luxury of not even having to think of our skin colour while growing up)
• white fragility (say those two words together and you'll really see some people get defensive, like the professor I'll be mentioning in the why-I-wrote-this-post section below)

So there you have it: the two main topics and related words (race, gender identity) that will send the anti-woke into a frenzy these days. Use them sparingly or liberally, as you see fit. ;)

Some other terms you'll often see bandied about by these folk include the by now often-misused term freedom, freedom of speech (a borrowed American term actually, as the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms refers to freedom of expression rather than freedom of speech, which, by the way, should not incorporate hate speech under the guise of "free" speech), parental rights (in conjunction with education), anti-mandate, government overreach, tyranny, global elite, global cabal, gatekeepers (a favourite term of Pierre Poilievre's), grooming, indoctrination, virtue signalling, cancel culture, and on, and on.  

TERFs in particular (if you're a radical feminist who is also trans-exclusionary I WILL call you by that name no matter how strongly you consider it to be a slur) who have become obsessed with the imaginary evils and threats posed by transgender women (yes, they ARE women) are equally obsessed with terms like biological sex (essentially positing biological determinism or essentialism arguments that feminists like myself have railed against for years), sex-based rights, and one of the more ridiculous terms, adult human female. 

It can be confusing, for sure, as one of the tenets of feminism is to reject gender stereotypes, but that doesn't mean that gender, along with sex, doesn't exist. And whether gender is more socially constructed or biologically based (my take on the 'is gender based on biology or merely a social construct' debate is that it's likely a variable combination of the two with other factors thrown in that differ for everyone), every person should have the right to express their gender identity as it feels comfortable to them.

Meaning that a cisgender woman should be able to present herself in more traditionally masculine ways if she wants, a transgender woman should be able to present herself in more traditionally feminine ways if that feels right for her, and ALL women should be able to present themselves any damn way they want. In short, there's no room for anti-trans sentiment if you consider yourself to be feminist, as anti-trans IS anti-feminist. And frankly, so-called feminists picking on the most vulnerable group of women as their main (and in some cases only) target of feminist activism (including the all-the-more-reprehensible for misusing her large platform, highly privileged and powerful J.K. Rowling), is disgusting. Using feminism as a cover to exclude trans people and justify transphobia is wrong on every level.

Now you may wonder why I've gone on at length about anti-wokeness (and gender issues in particular), on this vegan blog, so let me (at length again, I'm afraid), explain. I wrote about all of this stuff because:

• I'm tired of seeing the word "woke" everywhere, especially when used as a negative signifier
• while words change over time (e.g., gay no longer just means lighthearted and carefree), it bothers me when words or slogans (e.g., My Body My Choice) get co-opted 
• or worse, used to mean something entirely false, e.g., equating "grooming" with gender-affirming care for trans youth, rather than the actual process of manipulation by abusers
• and it's not just words, but anti-woke politicians actively trying to implement not only what can be taught in schools concerning race and gender, but anti-LGBTQ+ legislation that has real and devastating effects
• in fact, rather than youth wanting to transition because of social contagion as claimed, I'd argue that perhaps the real social contagion is the  “trans panic” that seems to have arisen among folk who are just repackaging all the anti-gay hatred and serving it onto the transgender community instead
• the folk objecting to woke also tend to be anti-mask, anti-vaccine, anti-mandate, skeptical of climate change, prone to conspiracy theories about things like "The Great Reset," obsessed with freedom that they falsely believe has been taken away, confused about what "free speech" does and does not include, and worst of all, convinced that their rights are being taken away while actively trying to ensure that the rights of groups THEY don't like are taken away
• I'm tired of seeing these symbols in my small Ontario town on a regular basis: huge Canadian flags on (usually) black pickup trucks, F___ Trudeau flags and bumper stickers (I even saw a Confederate flag once, and a bumper sticker saying "Jesus is my saviour, Trump is my President" for Pete's sake), and the fringe freedom fighters STILL congregating downtown every Saturday with their flags and picket signs
• man-child Elon Musk (remind you of anyone?) pandering to the anti-woke crowd on Twitter ensuring it becomes even more of a cesspool than it already is
• people with real clout and institutional power whining about "cancel culture" while using free speech that actually has the potential to cancel those with much less power simply for being who they are (I'm thinking here, for example, of toxic misogynist and weirdly-afraid-of-pronouns Jordan Peterson, J.K. Rowling once again, and even Margaret Atwood, whom I'd admired, retweeting anti-trans articles and signing, along with other privileged individuals, Harper's letter lamenting their concern that they're not free to say whatever the hell they want without social backlash or consequence. In other words, their speech should be free, but heaven forbid that anyone else complain about what THEY say. Again, this from people with big enough platforms that unlike others, they'll likely never encounter the danger of being cancelled, either figuratively or literally.) 
• speaking of powerful individuals, I had a fruitless email exchange with an Wilfred Laurier University professor and author of DIE and Respect are Bad (in part questioning his definitions taken from discredited self-proclaimed CRT expert/disinformation and conspiracy peddler/leading populizer of the term "groomer" as an LGBTQ+ pejorative, James Lindsay), who is also a member of an Academic Freedom Executive Committee (comprised of all male, probably white, middle-aged, straight, cis members) despising anything they claim to be woke, because boy, do they want to hold onto their power and privilege at all cost. Looking at his Twitter feed after, I realized I shouldn't have bothered.
• I'm tired of all the nonsense that gets normalized by Donald-types in the US trickling up north, and then leaving the fringes to become more mainstream
• I get scared, and sad, watching social conservative values, policies and legislation being touted and implemented across the world, and find it disheartening to see so many right-wing (some of them being very far-right) politicians being elected
• closer to home, Ontario Premier Doug Ford and Pierre Poilievre as federal Opposition Leader, yikes
• misinformation and disinformation hurts everyone
• if I thought fighting on behalf of other species was difficult enough, the taking away of rights of human beings belonging to minority groups will only mean that trying to make life better for ALL beings is even more of an uphill battle
• as vegans who believe that power is at the root of all oppression, and that various types of oppression are interlinked, intersectionality isn't just a buzzword
• as intersectional vegans, we can't just say that our focus is only on animals
• finally, as vegans, the sentiment of "stop trying to force your ideology down everyone's throats" is a familiar one, and no matter what group receives that message, it's usually sent by those not liking a dominant narrative challenged

Where do we go from here? I don't know. But I'd suggest that if you're not quite sure where you stand on certain issues, it might help to see who your ideological bedfellows are. For example, if you're an anti-vax vegan (why?) parroting all sorts of alt-right nonsense (again, why?), ask yourself why you'd align yourself with individuals or groups who otherwise have very suspect views on almost everything else. How could they then be completely in the right on this particular issue?

With any issue really, ask yourself, who are the enthusiastic supporters and promoters? Who are the detractors? Who would you rather listen to? In the case, for example, of people pushing anti-trans views, would you rather listen to and respect the opinions of trans folk directly affected, or someone like J.K. Rowling who doesn’t have any skin in the game?  Parse out what is fact, and what are speculation, conjecture, and fear-mongering, from reputable sources. In short, do your homework.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

* The updated Texas Republican Party platform defines homosexuality as an "abnormal lifestyle choice" and opposes "all efforts to validate transgender identity." State Attorney General Ken Paxton tried to classify transition-related care for minors as child abuse, and Governor Gregg Abbott called on people to report parents of transgender minors if it was suspected they were receiving gender-affirming care. Meanwhile, Florida Governor DeSantis signed legislation limiting the teaching of Critical Race Theory (CRT) and discussions of gender identity and sexuality in schools. It should scare the heck out of everyone that someone who proudly asserts that "Florida is where woke goes to die," may be running for President in 2024.

** couldn’t resist these links as they’re too bizarre for words:

https://blueprintforcanada.ca/the_cult_dynamics_of_wokeness.html

one which shows how CRT is misunderstood, misrepresented, twisted and distorted: 

https://blueprintforcanada.ca/what_anti_racism_in_CRT_really_means.html And I can say that having read a number of the books/authors they're particularly critical of.

and this “taxonomy” of woke religion which would actually be funny if its adherents didn’t think it was the gospel truth and it didn’t contain so many blatant untruths:

https://blueprintforcanada.ca/woke_religion_a_taxonomy.html

if you want, here's a Twitter thread debunking this entire Blueprint website: https://mobile.twitter.com/DrArendt/status/1565702149039947776

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

A lot to read, I know, so hopefully you made yourself a cup of tea to go along with it!

p.s. I now realize that according to the anti-woke I’m likely even woker than woke—though not exactly sure what the term for that would be, snort, and that to them I've probably swallowed the woke Kool-Aid whole, but hey...

animal justice academy

Hello folks! Hope to return to regular blogging again soon, so consider this a PSA.

There's an excellent FREE online boot camp for animal advocates going on right NOW called Animal Justice Academy. Currently in week 3, this one-of-a-kind informative and inspiring 6-week course covers almost everything you need to know to become a better advocate for animals. It's Canadian-based, but the knowledge and tools will be invaluable wherever you're located.  Each week there are video/audio modules for you to go through at your own pace, and twice a week there are live panels with a variety of speakers. 

Offered by Animal Justice (Canada’s only national animal law advocacy organization) this is an amazing educational opportunity that I can't praise highly enough. It's not too late to register, so check out the faculty and curriculum of Animal Justice Academy, and help yourself help animals even more! :)

did I tell you yet about getting kicked off of Facebook?

Yep, last August. Got an email from Facebook saying, "Someone asked us to review your profile because it might not be following our Community Standards. We ask everyone on Facebook to use the name they go by in everyday life—what their friends call them. You can keep your current name if it's the name you're known by. Otherwise, we'll ask you to edit it. Please review your name sometime in the next 7 days. After that, you won't be able to log back into Facebook until you update your name."

Well! Obviously, Have Gonevegan isn't my real name, but one (or a variation thereof) that I've used on most social media and on Facebook for over 10 years before someone complained. When I further investigated what "Help Us Confirm Your Name" actually meant, it boiled down to my providing them with two pieces of identification showing my legal name. Um, no. Call me paranoid, or just a lover of a basic semblance of privacy (even if imaginary), but I prefer to stick to my handle rather than real name.

So yes, I haven't been able to log into Facebook for a year because I haven't updated my name. Is it a loss? Kind of, as I can't like or comment on posts at all, but I believe that that's what got me into trouble in the first place. Because right before someone complained, I had left snarky comments on the pages of Marineland, African Lion Safari, a dog breeder, and if I remember correctly, a breeder of "mini" pigs. So there you go. I pissed someone off enough that they took action. My bet is on Marineland as they're notorious for trying to shut down dissent of any kind, but it could have been anyone.

I still do check out the pages of Esther and HEEFS although I'm constantly prompted to log in, which, of course, I cannot do without confirming my name (which I won't do) or updating it (which I can't be bothered to do.) Technically then, I haven't been kicked off so much as not wanting to follow the rules, but hey, what can I say.

In a way though I'm almost glad because for some reason, even though I like to think of myself as a fairly decent and kind person, there's something about both Facebook and Twitter that brings out the sarcastic/caustic beast in me. Blog posts by nature are longer and can therefore be somewhat more nuanced, but replying in so many words (or few, as is more often the case) can be lethal. 

While I still believe in the value of sharing information on these platforms, I'm not convinced they're the best way to persuade anyone of anything. There's the danger of these outlets acting as echo chambers, and people not listening to what they don't want to hear. I'm guilty of that too. Tell me you support Trump, or identify as right-wing, use phrases like reverse racism or acronyms like SJW, and I'm likely to dismiss you right off the bat.

No, I think the best way to reach people is face to face, but likely only when they've already opened their hearts and minds on their own. I've used a LOT of words online to try and bring about change, and I can tell you from experience that the most influential interactions I've had have all been accidental conversations with strangers. I call this Awesome Accidental Animal Advocacy (A to the 4th power?), and will outline two of my favourite exchanges in a future post sometime. 

'serenity and peace' or an attempt to silence protest? (Bill 156)

Well, you know my view on the matter, but this was one of the write-ups in response to the passing of Bill 156.

The comment at the bottom is mine, but it's a condensed version as I was only allowed 750 characters, including spaces. So, not enough space to say my piece. Below is a longer version. It was originally intended as a letter to the editor (which I would then have to cut down to 320 words), but the article itself wasn't published offline, therefore I decided not to bother submitting. 

Here is the long-winded version:

While I appreciate the reporter trying to provide a balanced view, here are some key points to consider.

Two themes in particular I’ve seen repeatedly put forth by proponents of the ag-gag law concern safety and disease. Farmers, apparently, are highly worried about safety. But safety of what? Their livelihood? Their reputation? That seems probable enough. Animals themselves though? That’s a bit dubious as they’re raised a) for profit, and b) to be killed, so I don’t think animals themselves will be “safe” for too long.

As for personal threats by trespassers, where are the statistics to back up this claim? How many farmers have actually been harmed or killed? And given the recent death (viewed as intentional by some) of activist Regan Russell, I would argue that activists may have more to fear from farmers and truckers than vice versa.

But back to stats. How many incidents of trespassing on Ontario family farms were actually reported to police in the last few years? How many charges were laid? How many convictions resulted? In other words, how have trespassers proven to be a real safety risk? Hmm, I see.

Another aspect often cited is that activist trespassing brings disease. But, as we know from prior zoonotic viruses like bird and swine flu, disease is already a part of farming because of the very practices that activists are trying to make public. The current Covid-19 pandemic itself underscores how infectious disease is a byproduct of farming and marketing animals.

And if things have changed considerably since 1989 as claimed by Mr. Witteveen, then why is it still considered reasonable to transport pigs, for example, without food, water, or rest for 28 hours? How is this humane? Why are certain practices, such as the killing of all male chicks, and the slamming of piglets into concrete walls, still considered both acceptable and standard?

Why are standard farming practices exempt from cruelty laws in the first place? That, in and of itself, makes the so-called tough anti-cruelty legislation of PAWS null and void, especially since the only duty to report in the PAWS Act lies with veterinarians, not employees. This makes Ernie Hardeman’s statement that nothing prevents employees from reporting animal abuse disingenuous at best.

The reality is that most animal farming industries would have died a natural death anyway were it not for being continually propped up by government bailouts. And now with Bill 156 we have a government turning an even blinder eye to industry promoted-and-protected cruelty by allowing animal agriculture to police itself.

No, the idea that this bill is balanced is so off-kilter it’d be funny if it weren’t so damn sad. 

For anyone interested in the true and harrowing dangers of the bill I would suggest looking at the comprehensive brief submitted by Animal Justice:

https://www.animaljustice.ca/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/2020-05-09-Animal-Justice-Submission-to-General-Government-Committee.pdf

whose lives matter?

Black Lives Matter.

And it's about time that Black Lives Matter has finally gotten the international support and solidarity it deserves. It also goes to show what can happen when the possibility of real change (and fear of what will continue to happen if the status quo doesn't change) galvanizes people into action. 

So what about All Lives Matter? Because from a vegan perspective, the idea that all lives matter (including other animals, specifically) seems to be reasonable and almost self-evident. And that notion IS what drives many vegan activists, this belief that all lives are worthy. Or to borrow from this quote:

The idea that some lives matter less is the root of all that is wrong with the world. --Paul Farmer

But we have to remember context here as the rallying cry of All Lives Matter has been used too often to dismiss the BLM message. A message often misunderstood. Black Lives Matter does not mean that ONLY black lives matter, but that black lives matter TOO. And that if black lives don't matter (with systemic racism suggesting they don't), all lives can't matter.

But for some reason this has confused people in a way that other campaigns have not. For example, those who fundraise for breast cancer won't get the pushback that they're ignoring other types of cancer. It's implied that all cancers are worthy of being eradicated, but that the particular focus here is a specific form of cancer. Same for other diseases. Campaigning for Diabetes, for example, doesn't mean Alzheimer's matters less.

So I was impressed to see Steve Jenkins from Happily Ever Esther Farm Sanctuary thank the person who helped him understand why using the AllLives instead of the BlackLivesMatter hashtag was problematic, and state that he was willing to learn in order to be the best ally. Sadly though, I think a number of his followers didn't get that particular point of his post.

It takes humility to admit you may have been wrong, and strength of character to be open to growth. And isn't that what vegans hope nonvegans will do? Take information that may be new to them and consider it with an open mind? While I understand his followers defending him (because yes, Steve has a heart of gold and we see his values exemplified daily), it's a bit disheartening to see some followers continue to insist that saying All Lives Matter is absolutely fine, when actually, it isn't.

Also disheartening is that Canadians have been a bit ignorant (smug, even) in denying racism in our own backyard, as evidenced by Ontario premier Rob Ford declaring on June 2nd that Canada doesn't have the same systemic deep roots of racism that the United States does. Um, right. Thankfully he quickly backtracked on that comment after receiving massive criticism. 

But the belief in the absence of racism in Canada is something many Canadians share. And I can even see how they may have that perception. Take the small town I live in; so incredibly white it's rare to see someone in it who isn't. You almost couldn't even blame anyone here for not knowing what white privilege is, and that almost everyone in this town benefits from it. That is, of course, if you conveniently forget the historic (and current) treatment of Indigenous people. Or the internment of Japanese Canadians back in 1942. No, racism is definitely NOT absent in this country.

What does systemic racism in Canada look like? Here are five charts illustrating the challenges Black Canadians face in terms of income, employment, education, and hate crimes. Contrary to the claim that systemic racism doesn't exist in Canada, Black Canadians say racism is just as harmful on this side of the border.

Want to be an ally in the anti-racism fight? Here are some actions you can take to help in the fight against racism.

Two books I have read recently that personally have helped me to better understand the topic of race are: So You Want to Talk About Race by American author Ijeoma Oluo, and Why I'm No Longer Talking to White People About Race by UK author Reni Eddo-Lodge.  I highly recommend both.

The takeaway for vegans in particular, I think, is that we have to be willing to listen and learn. Just as the feminist movement was rightly criticized for being mainly relevant to white middle-class women, vegans have to listen when we're told that veganism is mainly relevant to white middle-class folk. (Did you hear the echo?) We have to listen, respectfully, when we're told comparisons between the animal rights movement and the civil rights movement may be problematic. We also have to pay attention when survivors of sexual assault tell us that having their experience of rape compared to artificial insemination of animals may be inappropriate.

We have to remember that the ultimate aim of veganism is to eliminate oppression, period. That includes racism, sexism, classism, ableism and a bunch of other isms too. While it may be tempting to say that you only care about animals, humans ARE animals, and we have to help end oppression of them as well.

And one way of doing that is to honour the fight for racial equality by not routinely saying all lives matter whenever you hear Black Lives Matter.

have you met Cornelius the Wonder Turkey yet?

Okay, that isn't his real name (it's just Cornelius -- or Corno/Corny for short), but I'm hoping he'll prove to be as wonderful an ambassador for turkeys as Esther the Wonder Pig has been for pigs. Because it's that time of year when turkeys, though slaughtered and consumed by millions, are essentially rendered invisible. Sentient and smart and social as they are, they're horrifically reduced to single body parts and not given a second thought.

That is, until folk get to know a turkey personally or virtually (as they have come to know pigs through Esther), and realize they don't want to eat someone as classy and sassy as Cornelius. And that gives me hope. Statistics rarely sway, and numbers that are too big to fathom, too big to relate to, are easily dismissed. But the power of one is almost always more effective in changing hearts and minds. When people start seeing an animal of another species as having a personality, as having their own quirks, and having social connections much the same as we do, then it's harder not to recognize that they have feelings and would prefer not to be eaten. Or be deprived of the ability to live their natural lives with their own unique behaviours. 

So go, Corny, go! Show people worldwide how fabulous turkeys really are. Show us your true essence, and help educate people in ways that we mere human mortals too often fail to do. Be the Wonder Turkey that so many of us know you to be. :)

p.s. gosh, I haven't written regularly in a long time -- hope to remedy that soon!

twas the day after the election

‘Twas the day after the election, when all thro’ the world
Not a sane person was happy, baffled at what had just unfurled,
All hopes had been dashed, even though nurtured with care,
As citizens realized that civility is rare:
A bigoted narcissist is what some Americans wanted
So Donald took advantage and remained undaunted. 

And Hillary in her disgust, and Bill in his shock
Tried as they could to take clearer stock—
Because what had happened to cause this great rift?
This division of values, and misunderstood drift?
Racism and sexism held too many in its grip,
And that only bolstered Trump’s ugly ego trip.

Sure, some men might have cheered Donny boy on
But what could cause women to fall for this con?
And gays and minorities of all stripes and colours
Surely they saw through his worshipping of dollars?
So a sad world watched as obnoxiousness was rewarded
And learned the lesson that you can’t always clean something sordid.

******************************

no one wins November 8

Sure, someone will be elected, but with fierce opposition shown to both candidates, winning isn't the right word to use when half the American population will be pissed off no matter which person gets in. The elected candidate doesn't win, the lampooned parties both left and right don't win, and the people who are supposed to be the beneficiaries of democracy certainly won't win. Neither do the folk in other parts of the world held hostage to whatever decisions the incumbent makes. Global security and global economics are not factors to be taken lightly anymore. 

The other big losers in this election? Civility, decency, maturity, critical thinking skills, and empathy. And if anyone was foolish enough to think that racism and sexism were non-issues, this election brought out both to the forefront. Sexism, especially, reared its ugly head enough to be a central defining feature. Hillary Clinton doesn't smile enough and she's perceived as cold. Seriously? No, I mean, SERIOUSLY? When was the last time any male politician running at any level of office was admonished for not smiling enough? Accused of not being warm enough? And held accountable for offences committed by their spouse? Doesn't make any sense, unless of course a candidate is thought of as merely an appendage to that spouse. (Note: this doesn't mean Hillary isn't acutely flawed herself, or that Bill shouldn't be held accountable for the allegations of abuse directed towards him.)

A good test of sexism is to reverse genders and see if the same standards are held. Picture Clinton saying or doing any number of the offensive words and actions Trump indulged in almost daily, and imagine how long her campaign would have continued. Remember the ridicule Sarah Palin received (and rightly so) for her extreme lack of knowledge? Yet Trump was allowed to continue full steam ahead.

But the most jarring thing for me personally during this election was the downplaying of sexual assault. Being accused by more than a dozen women with credible stories doesn't disqualify one from becoming President. Words don't matter (dismissed as locker room banter), but actions don't either. That we shouldn't take sexual assault seriously was a lesson of this election. So, I take it back. The one clear winner no matter who's elected on Tuesday is misogyny. And depending on the election result, women's reproductive rights, gay rights, and transgender rights are all up for grabs. How sad, and how damn scary. Doesn't feel like 2016 to me at all.

Never before has there been so much palpable anxiety outside of America about who will be elected, because in a world that is now globally connected in so many ways, everything is at stake. But I feel badly for Americans who don't support Trump, yet who may have to live with the consequences right at home. I can only imagine their fear, worry, dismay and disbelief. It's not much of a consolation, but please know that your feelings will be shared worldwide. 

Dark times are indeed ahead, and like many people, one of my defense mechanisms for dealing with unpleasantness is humour. So here is my adaptation of part of a beloved Christmas carol for this can't-look-but-can't-look-away-either occasion. :)

 

Twas the Night Before the Election

‘Twas the night before the election, when all thro’ the world

Not a sane person was sleeping, anxious to see what would unfurl

All expectations were lowered with a sigh and a scowl,

In hopes that a defeated Donald wouldn’t make anyone howl;

But "deplorable" supporters stashed guns in their beds

While visions of revolution danc’d in their irrational heads.

 

And Hillary in her grief, and Bill in his fear,

Had just settled their brains in case things got near—

When out on social media there arose such a clatter,

People sprang to their devices to see what was the matter.

Away to Windows we flew like a flash,

Tore open our emails (yes, EMAILS!), and threw out the trash.

 

Except for one message, a beacon for sore sight,

And the only thing that could save just about everyone tonight;

Proclaiming the election a bad series of jokes,

Donald himself admitted to being nothing but a hoax.

So the weary world watched as Americans voted

And hoped never again to see anything so vile and bloated.

**************************

VOTE! And please vote wisely. THANK YOU.

 

"We interrupt this program..."

I'm sorry, I know this may not be the right place or time or even any of my business, but I just can't keep quiet any longer. Because certain events, even if they don't directly relate to veganism, or where I live, need to be discussed. I'm talking about the upcoming event that has already seen extensive discussion, and could have an impact on almost everyone no matter what country they live in.

I'm talking, of course, about the US election in deciding who is more qualified to be the next President. And the fact that some are having difficulty deciding "who is more qualified" is leaving many outside of the US nothing but gobsmacked. Worse, how did it even get this far? Because it sure makes me wish the words in the above graphic were true. Unfortunately, the most apt word to describe this election is surreal. 

But let me back up for a second. First, I realize that I may offend some readers with this post, and for that, I want to apologize in advance. Second, I don't remember any election in any country getting this much international attention, which I think indicates what's at stake for countries even far outside of the US, and why so many of us are also invested in the outcome.  

Note: the above was first drafted October 2, and sadly, enough has happened since that time to make the word I used to describe the election an antiquated understatement. Other suitable terms or phrases could now include any of the following: train wreck, nightmare, freak show, vile, offensive to the core, ugliness like never seen before, and unprecedentedly dangerous.

So at this point I was originally going to talk about why people outside of the US are baffled by how a non-politician with inferior verbal skills could have progressed this far, how Donald isn't a suitable candidate by almost any measure, his apparent symptoms of Narcissistic Personality Disorder and what that could mean post-election, how much of what he says is demonstrably false, the deep-seated sexism evident in this particular election (and that was before the video scandal even!), and the question of how Americans could possibly even want him representing them.

But some of the arguments for those points, I believe, have already been adequately shown by Trump himself and his core followers (and articulated by others already), so I'm going to venture down a different path instead. I'm going to talk about something that links this post to veganism.

Let me back up again for a bit. I'm sure I'm not the only one who has been watching this circus of an election with a reluctant but compulsive and fascinated revulsion. Kind of like a bad car accident, but one that seemed completely preventable, and one that involves this car crashing again and again and again. 

One difference though is that for a while I was actually quite angry with Americans as a whole, which given that I live in Canada doesn't make much sense. But maybe it's because Canada finally got rid of a prime minister last Fall whom I also couldn't stand (a right-wing robot who denied climate change and didn't have much respect for women, but was a lot more polite and sneaky about it), and/or because this American decision could have a global impact like never felt before.

At some point though I realized it wasn't fair to blame all Americans (besides it being childish), so I redirected some of that annoyance at Trump followers instead. So being curious about how people could support and believe an individual for whom I have nothing but contempt, I began to read his Facebook page in an attempt to better understand what I considered seriously duped folk. And I quickly realized that these people are just as genuinely perplexed at how anyone could support Clinton. Are just as convinced that this individual is not a good person, does not represent the average American, and that electing her to office is not only foolish and preposterous, but also downright dangerous. Well!

I've seen the question asked several times now what it is that Donald could say or do that would convince followers he's unqualified to be POTUS, and the answer is always nothing. (Now while I would like to believe that Clinton supporters WOULD draw a line if unacceptable words or actions became known, that might not in fact be true.) The point here though is that I'm exactly the same as those who support Trump, in that nothing that anyone says or does could convince me that Donald isn't the absolute worst candidate ever, and that if the unthinkable does occur, questioning the election result shouldn't be out of the question.

So what does this have to do with veganism you ask? Well, this reminds me strongly of the sometimes warlike attitude of activists within our own movement when we disagree with each other, and the difficulty we have when what seems so clear and obvious to us, is dismissed by those who still consume other animals. Just give them information, we say, just open their eyes, let the slaughterhouse walls become glass and they'll see what's apparent, they'll see what's right. It IS hard to understand why others can't comprehend what we do, and it's tempting to view them as ignorant or wilfully cruel or any other number of uncharitable things.

But as I'm slowly learning in this election (as late as it is in the cycle), it helps to start asking the right questions. What do core supporters see in Trump? What is he appealing to that goes beyond the automatic charge that any vote for Trump is a sexist vote and/or a racist one?  How does the Clinton campaign not serve the ones who truly think of her as evil incarnate? What in their real lives stands in the way of being convinced by her campaign?

And just as with veganism, how much of a role does confirmation bias play? How do we accept or dismiss information that may or may not concur with what we already believe? Or do facts not actually play a big role? Do we just believe what we believe, and align any new data accordingly?

With this particularly difficult election (because it must be hard if you dislike both candidates), what factors DO you take into account? Is it important, for instance, to take into account past or present actions of spouses? Is political experience a necessary requirement? What standards do you apply?  And are those standards gender neutral? For example, is one candidate held to a much lower or higher standard than the other? Would the words or behaviour deemed unacceptable in one, be accepted in the other? My own bias is showing here, but is one candidate being given more leeway for acting like "a boy" (hard to believe this man is actually 70 years old), while the other is given a tougher time because they have the audacity to be ambitious enough to try and even play in a traditionally male arena?

Whatever happens next, I'm afraid that the chasm between the supporters of Clinton and Trump may not ever close. How can either person so reviled by the opposite camp be a force for unification? How can, in the same vein, abolitionists and pragmatists see eye to eye? How could an animal rights activist ever get along with a writer of ag-gag laws? Does the investment of Tyson into Beyond Meat, for example, set an example of somehow finding common ground? I don't know.

The main thing in this election though is not to be complacent, because Trump has tapped into something that would be unwise to ignore. Look at Brexit. Look at the rise in popularity of populism globally. In my own country of birth, for example, Geert Wilders seems to be Holland's mini version of Trump, and that country's election next March will be interesting to watch as well.

This talk of "Donald has lost already" scares me because there are enough people determined to get him in, and Hillary's victory isn't a done deal until every vote has been made and counted. Please do not "Brex" yourselves. And please, American voters, know that citizens around the world are paying close attention and waiting for you to decide what version of America you believe in, as it may affect us all. Thank you for listening.

p.s. I'm sure you can guess what I'll be viewing tonight. ;)

mercy and Thanksgiving

Tomorrow, Canada celebrates Thanksgiving. (Although in some ways, in my opinion, it may as well be called Thanks-taking for all the harm done to innocent beings.) And while last November I took a different (more generous?) approach when I talked about the occasion as Americans celebrated it, this year I want to focus on mercy. Or the lack thereof.

Because this past week has been merciless when it comes to animals in Canada, and even though it's Thanksgiving weekend, I'm still feeling more angry than thankful. As most of you may know, there was a horrible incident involving 180 pigs in a trailer rollover that left many vegans reeling. I don't want to retell the awful details (some of which you can find in the links posted below), but this incident (in many ways the word accident is insulting) demonstrated just how vile and merciless this industry actually is. 

These posts will fill in the background for those not familiar with what happened, and provide good commentary for those who are:

• The Crime of Indifference
• Blinders, Barriers, and Bearing Witness
• After the Fearman's Pig Tragedy

On the same day that this travesty occurred, Bill C-246 (which would have updated Canada's antiquated animal cruelty laws) was defeated 198-84. This bill originally included things like changing the definition of bestiality, banning the import of shark fins, cat and dog fur, and making it a crime to profit from or breed animals for the purpose of fighting. This, apparently, worried supporters of hunting, trapping, fishing, ranching and medical research. So they said, essentially, screw animals.

My Houghton Mifflin Canadian Dictionary of the English Language defines mercy as "Kind and compassionate treatment of an offender, enemy, prisoner or other person [being] under one's power." 

Where was mercy shown this week? 

• not by staff of Fearmans Pork Inc.
• not by management of Sofina Foods 
• not by the manager of communications with Ontario Pork
• not by Halton Regional Police officers (they charged Anita Krajnc AGAIN)
• not by the Canadian Food Inspection Agency
• not by vets
• not by representatives of the Ministry of Transportation
• not by some of the media outlets and consumers, and
• not by members who opposed Bill C-246

In fact, more mercy was shown by some of the injured and needlessly killed pigs themselves (this haunting photo and others was originally taken by Andrea White), toward each other:

 

But I'm trying to remember that there ARE a lot of folk to be thankful for, and that mercy IS plentiful, as shown by:

• members of Toronto Pig Save (including Cow Save and Chicken Save)
• hero Anita Krajnc
• supporters of Anita and all those who attend vigils and bear witness
• everyone who expressed outrage at what happened in Burlington
• sanctuary supporters and founders (including Esther's dads of course!) 
• animal rescuers who work tirelessly without being in the spotlight, and
• anyone trying to bring about change for all animals

I'm also thankful that I can virtually visit with Esther and other sentient beings. They give me strength, respite, resolve, and comfort. 

Rest in peace, sweet pigs. We will NEVER forget you.

 

hug a vegan day (and other upcoming notable dates)

Today is Hug a Vegan Day, so consider yourself officially hugged! :)

Spread the love and if possible go hug every vegan you know. Give yourself (and any farmed or animal companions nearby) a huge hug too!

This time of year is filled with occasions to commemorate, celebrate or even mourn, so here are a few to keep in mind as the weather finally and blissfully gets cooler:

• September 30: Hug a Vegan Day
• October 1: World Vegetarian Day
• October 1: National Cut Out Dissection Month begins
• October 1-2: Worldwide Vegan Chalk Bomb
• October 2: World Day for Animals on Farms*
• October 10: Thanksgiving is Murder on Turkeys Day (in Canada)
• November 1: World Vegan Day (launching World Vegan Month)
• November 8: world watches anxiously to see if Clinton trumps Trump
• November 9: world still in disbelief that Americans let a reality star get this far
• November 24: Thanksgiving is Murder on Turkeys Day (in USA)
• November 25: Cruelty-Free Friday
• November 29: National Giving Day

Being vegan, even when it feels that progress is maddeningly slow, is the best gift you can give yourself, your loved ones, and even those you find a bit more challenging to love. The world IS changing, and we WILL get there!

* Ironically, the next court date for Toronto Pig Save's Anita Krajnc takes place the day after World Day for Animals on Farms, and the second court date falls right on World Vegan Day.

what every vegan should know about burnout (resource list included)

Which rather makes it sound like I have all the answers, but clearly I don't, otherwise I would've been able to avoid burnout myself. At least, I'm wondering if I've reached burnout given the tone of some of my previous posts (we-animals-deserve-to-rot-in-hell in particular), and my more-than-usual cynical mood of late.

For example, while I like the oft-used quote about slaughterhouses being made of glass walls, I don't think it's actually true, and in general think it's less a lack of awareness than an agreement that other animals are ours to use as we see fit mentality that's at play. Sadly, as long as animal use is profitable or pleasurable or both, a vegan world seems a long way off to me. On the other hand, I realize my the-human-species-as-a-whole-is-insufferable conclusion isn't really effective, and isn't going to help. And while the people-who-consume-animals-are-bad labeling syndrome may be tempting; it too is not strategic, and not likely to increase the number of vegans.

But, back to burnout. Is this a condition that every vegan can expect to face at some point? Given that I'm eight years into the vegan journey, should I be surprised or happy that at least it didn't happen sooner? Is it in part what can make a vegan become ex-vegan? (Thankfully, I don't anticipate that happening with THIS particular vegan at any time.) And is burnout the same as compassion fatigue? Are the two terms interchangeable? Nope, apparently not. Here's a helpful article outlining the difference between compassion fatigue, vicarious trauma and burnout.

In my own case, there's also a degree of caregiver fatigue thrown in, which makes me wonder if vegans acting as caregivers for elderly parents are even more at risk for burnout. It's a bit of a double whammy methinks, and given that most vegans and most caregivers are female, you could have fatigue coming at you from all sides. Actually, forget about double whammy. If you're female and part of the sandwich generation looking after kids and parents, AND participating in the labour force, you're likely looking at at least a triple or quadruple whammy, eek!

At any rate, since I don't have the answers that the post title implied I might have, I thought I'd look around and share what I find. Especially since if the statistics on recidivism are correct (I've yet to be convinced they are, but that's a topic for another post), and if some form of burnout precedes recidivism, then nearly most of us will face this battle at one point or another.

As with many other problems, prevention is always better than solving, but given the continual assault on the beings of our concern and the huge scale of what we're up against, I would say that it might be a big battle to prevent or overcome this too-common occurrence. Luckily, there ARE also many resources that can help, whew, so I've compiled a short-ish list (a long one can be overwhelming in itself if you're already stressed) and for convenience sake divided it into books, websites, PDF material, and articles. Take from them what you can, as other animals need us to be strong, resilient and healthy. As do other vegans!

BOOKS:

• The Power of Joy in Giving to Animals
• Trauma Stewardship: An Everyday Guide to Caring for Self While Caring for Others
• Aftershock: Confronting Trauma in a Violent World: A Guide for Activists and Their Allies 
• Compassion Fatigue in the Animal-Care Community (see FREE PDF version in PDF Material section below)
• The Lifelong Activist: How to Change the World Without Losing Your Way
• Chapter 9: Veganism and Caregiving in Never Too Late to Go Vegan

WEBSITES:

• The Animal Activist Support Line (24-hr email, text or online chat support) 
• In Defense of Animals -- Upcoming Events
• In Defense of Animals -- Animal Activist Helpline
• In Defense of Animals -- Activist Resource List (very extensive)
• Compassion Fatigue Resources List by Jessica Dolce
• Compassion Fatigue Awareness Project
• Resources list -- TEND Academy (Françoise Mathieu and Dr. Patricia Fisher)

PDF MATERIAL:

• Self-Care Assessment PDF worksheet
• Sustainable Activism and Avoiding Burnout (nifty flyer)
• Transforming Compassion Fatigue into Compassion Satisfaction: Top 12 Self-Care Tips for Helpers
• FREE PDF version of the Compassion Fatigue in the Animal-Care Community book listed in BOOKS above

ARTICLES:

• Activist Burnout: Understanding, Preventing, and Healing
• How To Still Create Change While Burnt-Out
• Self-Care Strategies: 100 Places to Start
• the personal stories of two activists (article on vegan mental health)
• should vegans be issued with mental health warnings?
• What is Compassion Fatigue?

MY OWN FAVOURITE QUICK PICK-ME-UPPERS:

• Happily Ever Esther Farm Sanctuary
• Esther the Wonder Pig

So there you go. That should be enough to keep all of us busy(ier) for a while, snort. Let's take nasty burnout, turn it inside out and nip it in the bud. Let's Keep Calm, Keep Vegan, and Keep Going. (Which is also my new motto and blog byline, woot!) 

who's gonna save our planet?

Often, I'm sad to admit, the pessimistic side of me thinks no one.

And most of the time I'm grateful to be over the age of fifty so that I won't have to watch as our Earth implodes due to human self-destruction. As I said, pessimistic. On especially cynical and misanthropic days, I even think it may serve the human species right if (due to stupidity, selfishness and greed) the planet it abuses and takes for granted will sooner, rather than later, cease to exist.

But then that wouldn't be fair to all the other species. Or future human generations who didn't create the mess that most of us (and by most, I specifically point the finger at other former-hippy-turned-capitalist-consumer boomers) will leave behind for younger folk to solve.

So when I heard wise-beyond-his-years Henry Marr (or wise because the years haven't descended yet?) implore others to smarten up already, a small sliver of hope pierced my sometimes-hardened heart. Maybe, just maybe, enough youngsters will eventually set things right that us oldsters have so screwed up. Is this kid vegan?

Probably not, but if enough kids like him are passionate about something that will have an impact on the environment, or any of the other social justice issues that at heart are about oppression and power imbalance, then there's a chance that all the bits of action added up can contribute to lasting change. Cuz it sure is gonna take more than my generation to save the bruised planet we're leaving behind for others.

Here's Henry in his own words:

 

If you want to follow this trying-to-save-the-planet young hero on Facebook (and in case you think hero is overstating it, check out some of the decidedly non-heroic comments contributed by adults on the YouTube video above), here's his page:

https://www.facebook.com/emotionalenvironmentalist/

Keep up the good fight, Henry. We're counting on you! :)

this ain't no joke

(Actually, the joke was on me as this post was supposed to be published on April 1, just as my Easter post was gonna be posted on Easter, snort, but life got in the way.)

Sometimes, of late, it's starting to feel like every day is becoming April Fools' Day. In addition to the never-ending hoaxes perpetrated by industrial agriculture on both people and animals alike (Certified Humane, anyone?), this mad world seems to be getting madder by the minute in a myriad number of ways. Take the US election. (No, please, take it and make it go away already.)

Folk around the world are bewildered and baffled that a buffoon like Trump could have gotten this far. On the other hand, Canadian-born climate-change denier and he-said-what? ("...the overwhelming majority of violent criminals are Democrats") Cruz is just as scary. And as tempting as it may be to say that if American voters want either one of these jerks as their leader then they'll get what they deserve, unfortunately other countries will be impacted by this vote as well. Which isn't to say that Canadian voters, for example, have always been wise either (look at how long dictatorially inclined Stephen Harper was in power), but their vote didn't have quite the global impact the US election results will have.

Here in Canada, the Jian Ghomeshi debacle captured our attention and outrage. Sure, this case should not have gone to trial and the outcome was no surprise, but it still felt like it might as well have taken place 50 years ago. Because while the admittedly damn-good-at-her-job Marie Henein might feel that justice was served and that the Canadian justice system does an equally good job when it comes to sexual assault cases, I beg to differ.

First, winning and justice are two very different concepts that should not get confused. Second, while it's nice to pretend that objectivity and impartiality rule, let's at least admit that even judges bring their own biases to the courtroom. Especially as to how women who report sexual assault ought to behave. And really, that is ultimately the crux of any rape trial -- not whether an accused obtained consent, but whether the accuser can prove beyond a reasonable doubt that they didn't give consent. The default position is that consent took place, which is weird when you consider that we don't require that people who are robbed, for example, prove that they didn't want to be robbed.

Put another way, women and men who report sexual assault have to prove that they're not sleazy lying skanks, and that everything they say or do before, during and after the assault (never mind that people react differently to trauma) can be used to prove their skankiness. So in the case of Ghomeshi who didn't even have to testify, it was the accusers who were asked to prove that they had not actually wanted to be punched, choked or have their hair pulled. Yes, they were not good witnesses (hence my belief that this case shouldn't have gone to trial), but unfortunately even the most perfect victims, if you will, face the same illogical burden of proof.

Third, just look at the statistics below. How can anyone think that with a conviction rate as ridiculously low as .03 percent that our justice system works when it comes to sexual assault? No, the system is a complete failure in this regard (see paragraph above), and should be considered an insult to, and by, everyone. 

 

And when it comes to assault, women are almost never served. How often don't you hear, "why doesn't she just leave?" (instead of insisting that the perpetrator leave) when it comes to domestic violence? Because sadly, it's when she does leave that her life is really in danger. More women are killed after they leave their abusive spouse because despite the rhetoric of women and children being valued in our society, the evidence illustrates they're not. Notice that we seldom ask, "why does he abuse?" just as the emphasis is usually on women to prevent being raped, rather than on rapists to stop raping.

No, the REAL domestic terrorism happening in Canada, the US and other countries worldwide is the accepted violence perpetrated on women and children in their own homes, on the streets, in the workplace and as a weapon of war. In other words, everywhere, and every single day. I also have no problem including violence done to other animals (rather than on behalf of) in the definition of domestic terrorism.

So why am I talking about politics, sexual assault and domestic violence on a vegan blog? Well, in part because animal cruelty often accompanies domestic violence. Many abused women report having had their animal companion threatened, hurt or killed as part of the abusive behaviour of their spouse. Women can be reluctant to leave because of these threats, and not all shelters accept companion animals. Statistics also indicate that children exposed to domestic violence exhibit higher rates of abuse toward animals, so the links between human and animal abuse are at least starting to be more recognized. 

But essentially, I think and talk about this stuff because violence and oppression are not species-specific. That is, the targets may be different, but the roots are the same. And as the Ghomeshi trial has shown, boy do we have a long way to go, baby. And that, dear readers, ain't no joke.

happy world day for farmed animals?

October 2 is World Day for Farmed Animals, and in looking for an image on Google, I came across several graphics with sweet lambs, ducks or calves sporting an enthusiastic "Happy World Day for Farmed Animals!" caption. Totally understand, and yet the word happy threw me off a bit as life for farmed animals is anything but happy, no matter what day it is. I truly hope no one still believes that farmed animals lead an idyllic life as illustrated in the awesomely cute image below, with the exception perhaps for those lucky enough to live in a sanctuary.

I even ran across one image that really had me gobsmacked until I went to the blog where it was linked to (not the blog mentioned in the pic) and realized that the dairy farmer in question was so thoroughly indoctrinated that they truly believe all sorts of nonsense such as: cow's milk is nutritious for humans, cows enjoy being milked by mechanical means, dairy farming is a noble and praiseworthy endeavour, blah blah blah.

Reality for farmed animals, as we all should know, is the exact opposite of happy and then some. Words like misery, suffering, cruelty, torture, hell and death are the words that I associate with this day (and every other day that sentient beings continue to be farmed), and it's up to vegans to remind others of the horrors that no farmed animal is spared.

Some are even willing to show their solidarity for farmed beings by participating in a one-day fast, and I would urge you to do the same if you can. 

But whether you're able to fast or not (disclosure: I'm working that day and the physical nature of the job will prevent me from doing so), there are 364 other days where you can make your position on farmed animals and every other form of animal use known. Join others in the fight to make the rest of human society (ha ha, almost used the W word here, veganelder) wake up to the fact that animal use is not okay. Let's try to make each day a truly happy day for other sentient beings by:

1. letting them stay alive
2. letting them stay together with their offspring
3. letting them stay together with the friends of their choice
4. letting them participate in their natural instinctual behaviours
5. letting them make their own choices as much as possible

(Don't like the phrase "letting them" in the list above, but it shows the absolute power human beings have over others they deem less valuable.)

In short, let's leave them the hell alone! 

the power of one, vegan style

While the thought of trying to make the world go vegan can be as daunting as trying to imagine world peace (although as veganelder pointed out in my last post, the term "human society" is usually more accurate than world), it can be more manageable when broken down into bits. And while there's no magic formula or easy 7-step process (this world would have become vegan already if there were), we too quickly forget about the power of one. Because the power of one multiplied exponentially can bring about change in ways we can't even possibly foresee. Who would have thought, for example, that a lone image of a deceased boy on a beach could be such a rallying point in the current refugee crisis?

What does the power of one look like? It can be:

• one pamphlet or book that finally opens someone's eyes
• one video or documentary that really hits home
• one blog post that inspires
• one image that galvanizes collective outrage
• one muffin or meal that makes someone realize animal parts aren't needed
• one day powerful enough to scare the ag industry silly e.g. Meatless Monday 
• one consumer product popular enough to cause lawsuits e.g. Just Mayo
• one mentor or role model
• one animal's world that has completely changed by being rescued
• one animal celebrity -- need I mention Esther? ;)
• one sanctuary
• one step in the right direction
• One Step for Animals
• one reason to either go or stay vegan
• one task
• one role
• one idea
• one thing
• one change
• one person

What can YOU do? That's up to you. There's lots of choice and enough to do, so pick what suits you. Pick what you love or what you're good at (often the same thing), because sticking to something and being able to do it over the long haul helps everyone. Keep in mind also that one thing isn't the same as a scattered or frantic do something, do anything approach, but a strategic focus that when multiplied can have real results. Reread pattrice jones' inspiring blog post Effective Activism, peruse 100 Ways to Change the World for Animals Part 1 and Part 2 from OHH, and:

Don't ask yourself what the world needs. Ask yourself what makes you come alive. And go do that. Because the world needs people who've come alive. -- Howard Thurman, American theologian and civil rights leader

Finally, remember that if nothing else, act as if what you do can make a difference, because it CAN and it DOES.

my first (and last?) letter to the editor

As I indicated on someone else's blog (sorry, I can't remember whose) quite a while ago, I think writing letters to the editor is a wonderful and worthwhile endeavour, but not something I want to do myself. Which is a bit odd given that I like writing, am opinionated enough and feel other animals need to be given a voice, yet am reluctant to do so.

Maybe it's because I live in a small conservative town and the opinions published thus far in our local papers tend to be the exact opposite of mine when it comes to reproductive freedom, gay rights, animal welfare, and well, just about everything else. In fact, some of the expressed opinions raised my ire so much that it caused me to stop reading the papers altogether. Maybe it's also because I'm employed in a Christian organization that doesn't share most of my political views, and while I would never lie about those views if asked, I don't go out of my way to share them. In short, I don't always feel like I have the freedom to publicly express whatever it is that I want without thinking about the potential consequences on both family (my mom and siblings all go to church weekly) and work.

So how did it get to be that I decided to do some scribbling anyway? Well, I stumbled across an opinion piece as I was cleaning my cat's litterbox (we're allowed to dispose of litter in newspaper in the compost bin here), and got annoyed enough to respond. And it took a certain amount of editing as I wanted to make sure it wasn't too reactive, too insulting, too inflammatory, too whatever. Imagine my disappointment then when it wasn't even published! To be fair though, I was a couple of weeks late, and there had been two other negative responses (here and here), so I can't really blame the editor. What galls me though is how this columnist gets to have his jerk-like opinions aired anyway, because this isn't the first time he's railed against "hippies" who care about animals.

In retrospect though, maybe it wasn't a bad thing to have my letter ignored. I don't think it was the best letter anyway as I WAS being reactive, was riled up when I wrote it, and it may not have served the best interests of those I was trying to represent. No, if I'm ever going to do this again, I should probably read the chapter and tips on letter writing in Mark Hawthorne's Striking at the Roots book first.

But because I did spend time on it (which I truly don't have enough of these days), and I can (within reason) say pretty much anything I want on a personal blog, I will let you read what I wrote, and perhaps you can let me know how to formulate it better next time for an audience that isn't my blog readership. Here goes:

Re. Lazy hippies have too much free time to troll online, Column, Feb. 12:

Ah James, you do think you’re clever, don’t you, what with all the cutesy capitalized names for folk who care about animal captivity and exploitation. But you might be surprised at the demographics of those you mock. Some of us are middle-aged or older, most of us are gainfully employed, more than a few of us are busy with child or elder care or both, and I would say that practically all of us wear deodorant. You see, what we’ve simply done is recognize that compassion can and should be extended to all living beings. (Even newspaper columnists, snort, so I apologize for those writing mean things to you on Twitter, although I can understand how a flippant and dismissive attitude such as yours would not inspire much friendliness.)

I’ve been vegan for almost seven years now, but in retrospect, I believe it was my first (and last) trip to Marineland as part of a school trip almost forty years ago that set me on this eventual path. Because watching the spectacle of magnificent beings reduced to performing silly circus tricks for humans struck me as sad and wrong, rather than fun. And while it took a long time for me to stop eating and wearing animals altogether (societal indoctrination supporting animal use is strong indeed), once I did, there was no going back.

Luckily, the number of people who believe that animals do matter (all animals, not just cats and dogs) is on the rise, and veganism is becoming more mainstream by the day. More specifically, the success of films like Blackfish indicates that it’s not just “hippies” who care about orcas and other captive animals. No, the writing is on the wall my friend, and one day archaic institutions like Marineland will become as extinct as the dinosaurs, and hallelujah to that I say.

So what's the verdict? Too personal? Too long? Not enough facts? Ah, at least no one can say I didn't try. :)

p.s.  letter update woot!

who says vegans don't have a sense of humour?

When I saw the comic below (many moons ago now), I burst out laughing.

Funny thing is, it was posted on a decidedly non-vegan site whose author used this to illustrate the folly and error of vegan ways. Kinda backfired methinks, because when you show the absurdity of one concept (quick rule of thumb for the "but plants have feelings too!" folk -- if a carrot doesn't scream when you lop its top off, it likely can't feel pain), it can actually strengthen the argument for another. In this case, the idea of showing solidarity for farmed animals in the many animal walks now common in numerous cities and countries. Not quite sure if the illustrator was also trying to poke fun at us, but hey, we should all (vegans and non-vegans alike) be able to see the humour in whatever it is that we do. The stereotype though, that vegans are unable to do this, is one that's gotta go. Plus it's one of the cop-out ways to try and discredit a group or movement. Cuz you know, all those feminists don't have a sense of humour either. Or anyone who doesn't laugh at a rape joke. Humour can be a double-edged sword: used wisely it can educate while entertain, cutting through bullshit in mere seconds, but sadly can also be used to keep tired myths and progressive groups in place.

Something else that made me laugh a while back even though it maybe wasn't supposed to, was a comment made by a character on Coronation Street, the world's longest-running TV soap and one of the few shows I won't have interrupted. I can't quite remember the context (although I believe it was Kylie talking about food allergies), and I'm paraphrasing here, but basically the line went something like this: Some people can't eat cows, some can't eat pork, others can't eat shellfish, and don't even get me started on vegans. I'm not sure why this prompted a loud guffaw on my part, but I suspect it was the unexpected -- hearing the word "vegan" on a television show, even in a derogatory way, is still novel enough that it pleases me enormously. Veganism has become mainstream enough to be made fun of (remember that humour can be a defense mechanism and non-vegans have a lot to be defensive about), so like it or not, vegan jokes are here to stay. Until of course the tipping point is reached and what is currently considered a minority stance becomes a majority one. But until then, let 'em laugh, because you know the old saying, she who laughs last... ;)

the inimitable and quotable Farley Mowat

Read the following this morning, and liked it so much I decided to look for more. :)

For those not familiar with Farley Mowat, he was a crusty but popular Canadian icon (he hated that label but I'm gonna use it anyway) who authored forty-one books (which I'm embarrassed to say I haven't read any of yet), a noted environmentalist, a lover of nature (not all environmentalists necessarily love nature I've come to suspect), an important critic, and an influential figure.

  

And while he wasn't vegan (although I like to think he eventually would have become so), he nonetheless was a champion for other sentient beings and certainly recognized the destructiveness of the human species.

For two in-depth articles on this rascally one-of-a-kind national treasure, click here and here, but I'll let Mr. Mowat have the last word:

“It is to this new-found resolution to reassert our indivisibility with life, to recognize the obligations incumbent upon us as the most powerful and deadly species ever to exist, and to begin making amends for the havoc we have wrought, that my own hopes for a revival and continuance of life on earth now turn. If we persevere in this new way we may succeed in making man humane ... at last.” 

and the "Humans Are Too Horrible For Words" award goes to...

(Will update my speciesism post next, but needed to get this off my chest first.)

Within twenty-four hours three different kinds of animal abuse situations (actually, four, but one was so heinous I won't even mention it) came to my attention with the result that I felt like crawling into a misanthropic bunker for the rest of the weekend. "Misanthropic bunker" is a term I came across in Kim Stallwood's interesting memoir Growl, currently campaigning (ending tonight!) on Indiegogo. 

Let me introduce the runner-ups first. Third (and definitely NOT honourable) mention goes to sheep-shearing sadists. Shearing sheep may not initally sound like the worst form of abuse, but as Debra Roppolo points out, sheep are gentle and kind beings, which makes the vicious violence demonstrated in these videos even more hard to take.

Second prize (although there are no winners here) is awarded to all who participate in, get ready for this, pig wrestling. Yes -- PIG wrestling. I thought I had pretty much heard of all the asinine ways in which humans treat other sentient beings (who in my opinion have more dignity than a lot of humans at this point), but no. Even worse is the fact that this dubious activity is being sponsored by grown-ups (the idea of pig wrestling could be amusing, you would think, only to drunk male adolescents) as part of a church event. Call me stupid, but I can't see the connection to spirituality here. Now, one church in particular is getting a lot of heat about this (despite massive protest the event went ahead yesterday), but sadly, pig wrestling is actually fairly common "entertainment" at many county and state fairs. 

No drum roll please, but first place (not that ranking animal abuse makes sense except to human animals who seem to want to rank everything) is bestowed on the f@*#ing a$$holes who decided that Harry Harlow was such a hero that his despicable monkey "pit of despair" study should be replicated. Yep, "scientists" (I don't know how to convey sarcasm better than that I'm afraid) are being funded to study monkey maternal deprivation all over again. As if the original studies weren't horrendous enough, repeating them is monstrous.

At the moment I can't think of anything more dumb (although using monkeys to try and figure out whether smoking is bad or not for pregnant women--um, we don't know that yet?--is pretty close) and cruel and heart-breaking and possibly evil, and it's making me want to email the numbskulls involved and use language that would make the above slightly altered swear words sound like something a nun might say. Channel anger constructively is what I'm repeating to myself over and over lest I compose undiplomatic and tactless (but who says polite is always best?) messages that likely shouldn't see the Send button. So, there you have it. Never fear that human stupidity and cruelty will ever end, or that our work will ever be finished. :(

It's at times like this that I like to go visit Esther, who along with her two fine dads, reassures me that not all humans are hateful. In fact, I say we nominate them for a Most Likely To Put A Smile Back On Your Face award right now. Anyone second the motion?